Council presses Eversource on winter rates, cross‑subsidies and corporate responsibilities as DPU opens investigation

Springfield councilors used a Dec. 18 meeting with Eversource to press for clearer explanations of this winter’s expected energy bills, express frustration over rising costs and ask whether the utility or shareholders should shoulder more of the burden for public‑benefit and infrastructure charges.

Eversource manager Richard Jin walked the committee through a new bill layout intended to make charges more transparent by separating supply, maintenance and public benefits. "So now there's gonna be three elements in the bill: supply, maintenance and infrastructure investment, and then this public benefits piece," Jin said, explaining that supply reflects the market cost of gas and that distribution covers pipes, compressor stations and local maintenance.

Eversource staff cited example line items and sample amounts: a residential customer charge of about $12.20 and a public‑benefits component—covering Mass Save energy‑efficiency programs and payment assistance—that the company estimated at roughly $55 for an average winter month. The company said low‑income discounts were restructured years ago into a percentage discount and that a live docket at the Department of Public Utilities is reviewing whether to expand tiers or otherwise change the program.

Councilors repeatedly asked whether discounts and public‑benefit costs are absorbed by the company or passed to other ratepayers. One councilor called the current arrangement "corporate greed," and asked whether the city could pursue bulk purchasing or aggregation. Eversource said public‑benefits costs are shared among customers and that community aggregation and alternate suppliers are available options for electric supply.

Eversource and company spokespeople emphasized that rates and profits are subject to DPU review. "The Department of Public Utilities has opened an investigation into...rates and bill impacts to customers," Jin said, and the company invited stakeholders to participate in the public docket.

Tensions rose when the presiding councilor said he would withhold municipal approvals for Eversource work orders until the utility addressed the city’s concerns about affordability. "I will not support any work orders for anything that Eversource will do until they address our issues," he said, and encouraged other municipalities to consider similar pressure. Company staff cautioned that withholding permits would disrupt work that supports city services and local employment and urged regulatory and stakeholder engagement instead.

No formal vote or municipal action was taken during the meeting. Eversource said it would return with cost estimates for converting decorative fixtures to LED and gather additional details on staffing, temporary lighting options and smart‑monitoring alternatives. The DPU docket remains the principal venue for addressing structural rate questions.

What’s next: The DPU investigation will accept public participation; Eversource will provide the committee with follow‑up cost estimates and links to bill‑assistance resources.